Many legal issues facing young people in Victoria require the law to be either reformed or practised differently.
Our projects are areas where the law could be reformed for the better. Youthlaw is working with other agencies to improve the law in these areas. If you want to help, or know more, contact Youthlaw.
Vision: A just and equitable society for young people [1.3MB PDF]
Youthlaw Policy Platform for the Victorian Election 2006
Summary of Government's 2006 Justice and Youth Election policies [23kb PDF]
Our visions is positive decision making, policy and law reform processes informed by young people's voices and experiences of the law.
We aim to develop and promote a youth engagement and participation model whereby young people, particularly from marginalised groups, are;
- meaningfully involved in all levels of advocacy, policy development and law reform,
- empowered to influence law and justice policies that affect their lives, and
- partnered with youth, justice and human rights sector workers, to affect change.
Youthlaw's Real Rights Project is talking to young people about their rights. Young people tell us about some of their human rights issues, what rights are important to them and how empowering it feels to advocate for change.
Campaign Respect is an advocacy project and grassroots campaign being sponsored and supported by Youthlaw. Campaign Respect is a youth driven research project, which seeks to address a perceived prejudice against or targeting of young people by of Victorian Public Transport authorised officers. Campaign Respect aims to investigate young people’s experience of authorised officers via face to face surveys and digital technology. It aims to create opportunities for young people to share their experiences of their interactions with AO's through written, photographic and video (via phone or digital camera) footage submissions. Their stories and contributions will provide the evidence base for the campaign that will then be used to publicise these experiences and lobby the government departments and public transport operators to address inappropriate behaviour of authorised officers.
The Brumby Government recently announced a Promote Respect plan. The government says the intention is to help young Victorians to connect to community and respect themselves and others. Vic Gov't Respect Agenda
The Respect Agenda coincides with increasing concern and media coverage of youth violence. At its most extreme young people are being portrayed as generation out-of-control.
The policy is being referred to by the government when there is coverage of violence. A recent example was in response to the gang of men who attacked a security guard at Docklands despite the fact that they looked like adults or even middle-aged. Alcohol fuelled violence is a focus. Once again the offenders are overwhelmingly not teenagers but adults between 20 and 35 with disposable income.
Even if the Respect agenda itself is ok it is too readily being used to sterotype young people and reinforce myths. Youthlaw has called for respect both ways Youthlaw is launchimg it's own Respect Campaign. You will be able to send in your stories and pictures about disrespectful treatmemt by ticket inspectors.
Youthlaw will be monitoring the implementation of the Respect Agenda and will keep you posted.You can read comment by the Youth Affairs Council of Victoria about the Victorian policy by folowing the link below
The UK has also previously introduced a Respect Agenda and you can read comment on it at UK Respect Agenda
Youthlaw and other youth organisations are continuing to campaign for free public transport for homeless young people.
See our latest update on the campaign.
Youthlaw maintains issues of violence in public places and alcohol fuelled violence which get so much media attention, are not just youth issues, rather community issues, requiring a community response. This assertion is backed up by Victoria Police statistics for 2008-9 which indicate that adults are the main perpetrators in regard to the increase in violent crimes in Victoria.
Young people themselves experience criminal violence at higher rates than other age groups. And vulnerable & marginalised young people experience higher levels of victimisation than other young people. Indigenous young people are also more likely to be a victim of violence than non-Indigenous youth.
A number of culturally and linguistically diverse young people Youthlaw assists have had multiple experiences of conflict-based interactions with police, with assault by police being “commonplace”.
Research tells us that where a young person is both an offender and a victim, victimisation often comes first, then criminal behaviour. Our casework experience also supports a theory that there is a strong inter-relationship between poverty, child neglect and youth offending, with re-offenders often being highly damaged young people. Typically young people re-offending are not receiving the support they require to address the issues that are behind their offending including child neglect, lack of community and family support, links to the child protection system, being disengaged from education, poverty, homelessness, and mental health issues.
Responding to abuse, neglect and victimisation of young people from childhood would be a powerful and practical way of reducing youth crime and violence offences against other young people.
Youthlaw’s concern is that government, faced with significant pressure to be taking quick fix measures, will resort to punitive law and order responses which will overwhelmingly target young people and other cultural groups who are in public places. An example of this is prposed police nove-on powers which have not been successful in reducing crime, or addressing the underlying causes of youth offending, but rather have resulted in unfair targeting of vulnerable young people and been misused without valid reasons in other states they have been introduced.
Youthlaw encourages state and federal government to take a more considered, rights-based approach that acknowledges the complexities of these issues and recognises the need to address the underlying causes of youth offending, and wherever possible divert young people form the criminal justice system. Research indicates that diversionary measures, such as cautions and conferencing, are more effective in reducing re-offending than traditional and more punitive methods of punishment.
A rights-based approach also involves dealing with social problems with young people seen as part of the solution.
We made submissions to inquiries by two parliamentary committees (one state and one federal)into this issue.
Youth Disability Advocacy Service(YDAS)
Youthlaw, the Youth Affairs Council of Victoria (YACVic)and the Disability Discrimination Legal Service (DDLS) got together in 2006 to lobby the state gov't to fund an advocacy service for young people. This was funded and has been up and running for the past 3 years. It is a fantastic organisation with with a steering comprised entiely of young people. It has an advocate who assists individual young people and its involved in establishing youth avocates throughout Victoria, making films and working on lots of systemic issues.
Access barriers to tertiary education.
Currently Youthlaw is working with a group of young people through YDAS to look at ways to tackle barriers to acessing tertiary education using the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
Young people as victims of crime
In September 2008 Youthlaw and YDAS spoke at a Government initiated Youth Justice Forum in Melbourne for workers in victim support services. The forum heard from young people and advocates about young people as victims of crime.
Deborah Lawton individual advocate from YDAS spoke about additional barriers for young people with disabilities including:
- Vulnerability compounded by disability
- Being under statutory care - more difficult to proceed with complaints
- Abuse is more often in domestic sphere
- Fear of complaining if person known (and is a carer)
- Lack of confidentiality
Summary of paper presented at Privacy Victoria's conferenfce “Watch this space: Children, young people and privacy, on 21st May 2010
Drawing from experience of our legal information and advice service, we highlighted three areas, by way of case-studies, where young people have difficulty accessing their right to privacy. We conclude with a number of suggestions to assist in making complaints mechanisms more user friendly for young people.
1. Criminal records and convictions
Current Victoria Police policy is to release criminal history information on the basis of findings of guilt, including non-conviction records for a period of 10 years for adults, 5 years for children. This means a police criminal record check not only reveals whether they received a criminal conviction, but also a finding of guilt without conviction.
The resultant release of information and confusion about the meaning of ¡§convictions¡¨ and ¡§criminal records¡¨ has had a dramatic impact on young people's lives and their livelihoods. People have lost their jobs, refused employment and discriminated against on the basis of trivial matters.
Unlike most other Australian states, Victoria has no legislation prescribing what information the police must release through a criminal history check.
In Youthlaw¡¦s our view there should be a clear legislative framework which regulates criminal record management and the release of criminal histories.
2. Surveillance
At a forum on public surveillance in July 2009, young participants raised the issue of the improper use and control of closed circuit television cameras (CCTV) footage by police and security guards.
Youthlaw endorses a number of requirements for video surveillance by public authorities and private users of public surveillance aimed at ensuring that surveillance is a proportionate response to potential harm:
- People should be notified if they are being watched in public places, or else the surveillance
- system should be obvious;
- People subject to surveillance should have an effective remedy if they believe their rights have been infringed; they must also be informed of the remedy and how to use it;
3. Personal health and other information
Social Workers, counsellors and other health professions have an obligation to keep confidential information disclosed by a young person.
Young people deemed mature enough to receive counselling without the presence of a parent or other person are entitled to privacy and may request confidential services, including treatment.
However we hear from young people about cases where the counsellor has breached confidentiality by telling parents, or family members without the young person¡¦s permission, especially in a school context.
4. Complaint processes when a young persons right to privacy has been violated¡K
Young people should have equitable access to the mechanisms in place for making a complaint. Young people are welcome to complain to the Privacy Commissioner about alleged breaches of privacy by public sector agencies and try to settle them though conciliation. However we know that young people do not easily make complaints or seek redress.
For the full paper click below
In 2005 the Public Space Action Group (PSAG) was formed. Members included Youthlaw the Youth Affairs Council of Victoria, the Centre for Multicultural Youth, the Western Young People's Independent Network and the Equal Opportunity Commission of Victoria. In 2005 PSAG orgsanised a forum for young people to talk about public space and produced a report. You can Download the Space Invaders Forum report [1.32MB PDF].
We made comment in regard to legal controls of entertainment precincts “A Good Night for All - Options for improving safety and amenity in inner city entertainment precincts” - February 2005 [152K Word file].
In 2006 we consulted with a group of Victorian Certificate of Applied Learning (VCAL) students in the City of Port Phillip about their human rights in the context of public space.
They identified factors that make it difficult for young people to enjoy this right including:
- A lack of welcoming, safe and free places for young people to hang out.
- A lack of free activities to keep young people out of trouble.
- Police, transit officers or security guards targeting and hassling young people.
- Young people being judged negatively by community members for hanging out together.
- Council hold more free activities and festivals.
- A place for young people to hang out be established.
- Work be undertaken to address negative community perceptions of young people in public areas.
- There is a need to promote the message that ‘kids have equal rights to public spaces’.
We made comment in 2008 on a device that would have a detrimental impact on young people - Ultrasonic 'teenager deterrent' device media release.
In late 2008 Frankston Council debated introducing move -on powers in Franskston. Youthlaw spoke to young people in frankston about the powers and also about how safe they feel on the streets.
A majority of young people agreed that violent and aggressive behaviour is a major concern in Frankston City, with many reflecting that they did not feel safe. Other concerns raised included a lack of accessible, inviting public spaces & the need for a more respectful, positive police presence.
Young people had mixed responses to the proposed by-law, however many expressed concerns about how the power may be used by police.
We put in a written submission to the council with their views and also ideas on what could be done to make Frankston safer and more friendly to young people.
We also included what has happened in other states where move-on pwers have been introcuded.
In Queensland and NSW criticisms of such powers have been :
- they are open to misuse and unfair targeting
- they are overwhelmingly issued against young people
- they lead to an escalation of conflict between police and young people
- Police often don't record using the power, leading to reduced accountability and legal review.
- many directions are issued without a valid reason.
A review conducted by the NSW Ombudsman of move-on powers introduced in 1998 authorising police to disperse people acting in a disruptive manner found that of 14,455 move-on directions issued during the one year study:
- 48% of all directions were issued to people under 17, with the peak age being 16.
- 16 year olds were nine times more likely to be ‘moved on’ than 26 year olds, and 19 times more likely than 36 year olds.
- Move-on directions were issued to young people more on the basis of who they were, rather than what they were doing.
- Young people hanging out in groups were often thought to be intimidating or likely to cause fear by their mere presence.
- In all recorded incidents for the year, young people under 25 represented 54% of total incidents, but the same group accounted for 79% of move on directions in the same period.
Other Councils in Victoria have been interested in move -on by-laws.
In Bendigo the Council debated having such a law but decided it would unfairly target already vulerable and disadvantaged people (eg homeless, Koori & young people). In this way they thought such a law could be a breach of Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
Last year the Vic government introduced the Liquour Reform Act. This gives the Director of Liquor Licensing the power to make entertainment precincts 'designated areas'. A number of streets in Frankston CBD are now a designated area. The focus of this law is preventing alcohol-fuelled violence. Police can issue a banning notice for 24 hours and courts can issue exclusion orders for up to 12 months. Banning notices are like move-on powers.
At Youthlaw our view is that this law has many more safeguards than move-on powers. (eg. a banning notice must be given to a person, not just be verbal, is limited to a number of steets) The focus of the law are those entering and leaving entertainment venues.
Read Youthlaw's Getting There: A Homeless Youth Transport Policy Proposal For Victoria submission [345KB Word file].
President’s Review of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal is hapening in 2009. In our submission Youthlaw urged the President to be vigilant is ensuring and supporting participation of children and young people in Tribunal processes. The 1997 Report by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) and Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) Seen and Heard: priority for children in legal processes (ALRC and HREOC 1997) found that there was a ‘consistent failure’ by institutions of the legal system to consult with and listen to young people about matters that directly affected them. [1.30] Appropriate participation can be extremely difficult because the adult-orientated legal and administrative processes themselves are not designed for participation by children and young people. Our casework has demonstrated the disadvantage faced by some children and young people in accessing and participating in Tribunal processes.
One of our key recommendations was to review Tribunal processes in light of the report Seen and Heard to ensure they support young persons participation in Tribunal processes. This would be aided by some specific recommendations including:
- Counter staff be appropriately trained to provide young people and other disadvantaged people with
accessible information about VCAT applications and follow up processes.
- Ensure all application and other Tribunal forms and guides are simple and youth user friendly.
- Review the income levels guiding a fee waiver application and/or exercise discretion more widely
for financially disadvantaged young people.
- If a young person, under 18 years, lodges an application the Tribunal refers them to a support
person, and ensure they have access to free legal advice and representation.
- Tribunal members to ensure adjournments and multiple directions hearings are kept to a minimum
and matters are as streamlined as possible.
Summary Offences Amendment (Tattooing and Body Piercing) Bill Exposure Draft:
Youthlaw’s submission - March 2008 [272KB PDF]
Body Piercing Forum Discussion Paper [208K PDF]
Letter to Ministers Hull, Andrews and Merlino on the Body Piercing Bill 2007 [74K PDF]
Youthlaw gets a lot of calls from young people and family about school bullying - about being bullied and being accused of bullying.
The Federal government is currently looking at expanding anti-harrasment laws to cover young people who are subjected to bullying online.
You can call, email or drop-in to Youthlaw for advice about bullying.
You might also want to watch the recent Four Corners program The Bullies playground. Young people talk about what happened them and what works to deal with it.
The direct link is The Bullies Playground
Children's Bill Exposure Draft - September 2005 [131K Word file]
Protecting Children: Ten Priorities for children's wellbeing and safety in Victoria - October 2004 [227K Word file]
Protecting Children - February 2004 [125K Word file]
Youthlaw is writing to express our concerns regarding the introduction of the Severe Substance Dependence Treatment Bill 2009 (the Bill). The Bill has been introduced into the Victorian Parliament to “provide for the detention and treatment of persons with severe substance dependence, where this is necessary as a matter of urgency to save the person’s life or prevent serious damage to the person’s health”.
Youthlaw is concerned the Bill is likely to disproportionately disadvantage at risk, vulnerable young people (over 18 years) with substance dependence issues and possibly mental health issues. Some specific concerns include:
1. Involuntary detention and treatment of an individual who has committed no offence is a significant interference with fundamental human rights in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Charter), in particular right to liberty and security of the person (section 21) and the right not to be subjected to medical treatment without consent (s10 c) and fair hearing (s24) and equality (section 8). For example given current community perceptions that young people are responsible for “alcohol fuelled” violence, civil detention has the potential to be used for purposes other than drug treatment i.e. ridding the streets substance affected young people.
2. There is a lack of evidence base supporting involuntary detention and compulsory treatment of non-offenders as a reasonable, necessary and effective treatment, especially for young people. Rather research and health professionals maintain that in general it is the client’s own internal motivation that counts in terms of whether they stick with treatment, regardless of how much external coercion there is. In other words, the drug using person has to want to get treatment.
3. There are less restrictive means of achieving the purpose of the Bill including engaging persons in health promotion and educative strategies and in voluntary treatment. Unfortunately many young people with substance abuse issues currently experience significant difficulty and waiting lists in accessing voluntary treatment and rehabilitation programs. It is vital that those who wish to access treatment are able to do so.
Check out our submission to the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee of Victoria Parliament
Inquiry into strategies to prevent high volume offending by young people:
Submission September 2008 [389K PDF]
Department of Justice Review of the Exceptions and Exemptions in the Equal Opportunity Act:
Submission from the Federation of Community Legal Centres (VIC) Inc. April 2008 [139KB PDF]
Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Victoria):
Youthlaw's submission to Victorian Attorney-General's review - January 2008 [237KB PDF]
Equal Opportunity Legislation Review:
Youthlaw's response [64kb PDF]
Graffiti Prevention Bill: Draft Exposure [94kb PDF]
Press release in regard to the graffiti prevention bill 2007 [76K PDF]
“Have Your say About Human Rights in Victoria” - August 2005 [150K Word file]
Youthlaw's response to the Committee's report [45K PDF]
Transport (Passenger Vehicles) Regulations - June 2005 [112K Word file]
Transport (Ticketing and Conduct) Regulations - June 2005 [110K Word file]
Suspended Sentences Review - June 2005 [1.01MB Word file]
Suspended Sentences [50K Word file]
County Court Appeals [33K Word file]
In mid 2009 the Victorian Law Reform Commission is conducting a review into surveillance in public places and how it can be regulated.
Our submission focuses on the overuse and abuse of closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance in both public and private spaces, so much as it impinges on human rights of young people protected by the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (2006) (Vic) (“the Charter” ). Given that for many young people public space is a place of socialisation, CCTV use has the potential to discriminate against young people legitimately using public space, to amount to an invasion of their right to privacy, a reduction of their right to freedom of movement and association and exclusion of young people from their enjoyment of public spaces.
The legitimate interest that public authorities and private organisations have in using surveillance devices to safeguard against threats to public safety and interference with property must be balanced against the potential infringement of these individual rights protected by the Charter.
Youthlaw supports a range of law reform initiatives that will assist government to effectively balance competing interests and to discourage and prevent inappropriate use of surveillance.
To see our full submission click onto the link below
Youthlaw in partnership with the Victorian Law Reform Commission and YACVic, are consulting with young people about CCTV and Surveillance on Tuesday 14th July 2009. This will inform the Commission’s report.
Seen and heard: priority for children in the legal process (ALRC 84)
This inquiry into the way children and young people are treated by the legal system and legal processes began on 28 August 1995. This was a joint inquiry conducted by the ALRC in conjunction with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC).
Two Issues Papers, Speaking for Ourselves: Children and the Legal Process - Kids Issues Paper (IP 17) and Speaking for Ourselves: Children and the Legal Process (IP 18), were released in 1996.
A Draft Recommendations Paper, A Matter of Priority: Children and the Legal Process (DRP 3) was published in 1977.
The inquiry was completed with the tabling of the final report, Seen and Heard: Priority for Children in the Legal Process (ALRC 84) on 19 November 1997.
There has been partial implementation of the recommendations in ALRC 84.
The Parliamentary Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee Inquiry into Stategies to Prevent High Volume Offending by young people(August 2008) provides a very comprehensive overview of data and research available on youth offending. The report suggests that it is very likely that the bulk of youth offending is committed by a small perecentage of young people (around 6%) and that the key drivers of this offending appear to be lack of intimacy, neglect and physical abuse from childhood to adolescent. These young people have a high likelihood of entering child protection followed by juvenile detention and sometimes adult prison.
In it's final report the Committee state:
“…a principled & progressive model of youth crime prevention that addresses the causes of juvenile offending and antisocial behaviour is one that is based within a framework of children's rights rather than within the more traditional and arguably punitive approaches."
A study by the Australian Institute of Criminology released in September 2009 has found that jailing young people isn't effective. the study about NSW young offenders found that locking up juvenile offenders appeared to have no greater deterrent effect on the rate of re-offending than lesser non-custodial penalties.
That locking up young people is not particularly effective is not news to Youthlaw or to many in the juvenile justice system in Victoria. NSW locks up 2.5 times as many young people as Victoria does and yet has a higher youth crime rate.
In Victoria 3% of convicted young people are locked up.
75% of convicted young people commit relatively minor offences and receive a bond, fine or undertaking or are referred to a diversionary program. They are given deferred sentences so they can access services to address underlying issues. Most do not re-offend or if so re-offend once or twice.
The remaining 22% have committed more serious crimes and receive a range of supervisory orders. Under these they receive assessment to identify underlying issues drive and casework support and supervision from juvenile justice workers. They also have the option to attend group conferencing that has been shown to reduce re-offending and the seriousness of re-offending.
Addressing the underlying reasons why young people offend is highly effective in reducing re-offending. Commentators who consider this 'soft justice' don't know what they are talking about.